Trade Value of: Luke Glendening.

I only watch games during weekend , its hard to judge the team , but what I notice we are good skating team and Gleny one of the reason why . Its looks like we need to have a sniper , Zadina going to help next year . Unfortunately Mantha not doing what we expecting from him , I think its mental , he needs help in this department . We need to get # 1 defenseman , and if Green + Glendenning for example bring to us thru #1 defenseman I will be very happy

I think he could get a 3rd or a 4th if a 3rd I would go for it. It would be awesome to see Toronto get a flavor of the Gelndening Babs love affair that we were subjected to. I think his value is only realistic in a package though, I doubt anyone sends a 3rd or 4th just for Glendening

I only watch games during weekend , its hard to judge the team , but what I notice we are good skating team and Gleny one of the reason why . Its looks like we need to have a sniper , Zadina going to help next year . Unfortunately Mantha not doing what we expecting from him , I think its mental , he needs help in this department . We need to get # 1 defenseman , and if Green + Glendenning for example bring to us thru #1 defenseman I will be very happy

Click to expand...

i think at this point its probably best we make mantha the #2 go-to scorer on the team and hopefully Zadina can be that number 1. I think if you can find the right chemistry and lineys he can be more suitable on the 2nd line vs the first line. less pressure, more room to move playing against other teams second unit or worse.

In any sense, i could see arguments on both sides to keep and trade Glendening. If the deal is right, do it. Make sure you keep enough strong people in the lockerroom and go from there. By the time we need someone like Glendening, he'll be nearing the end. Too bad people cant be busting our doors down for Helm or Abby.

I agree with the sentiment that there is no rush to liquidate players, especially if they have some internal value that might outweigh their trade value, but I have seen the argument a lot (and even presented it myself yesterday on the trade board) that Glendening would cost more to move because he is a veteran player signed to a really reasonable contract and is a leader/ good teammate/ could wear an A/ etc. kind of guy for us.

This is the Detroit Red Wings in 2019. This organization has overstocked itself on "leaders" and "good teammates" etc. for so long. Even if we did trade Glendening and the return isn't a thrilling assortment of picks/ prospects, this team still has Abdelkader, Helm, Ericsson, potentially Kronwall if he comes back for a year who have been with the organization for ~10-12 seasons. After that you have Green, Daley, Nielsen, Bernier who have all been around the league for considerable time and carry veteran leadership and experience with them.

Trading Luke Glendening doesn't mean the well is dry in terms of "good veteran leaders" or those types of guys. It means you want to capitalize on a depth player's value in the height of your team's rebuilding period, and there should be no issue with that. Again, liquidating him just to be rid of him - no point in that. He has a strong role and serves a purpose for the team. Getting solid value for a guy nearing 30 when the team is at least a couple years away from any serious contention? Absolutely pull the trigger on that.

I agree with the sentiment that there is no rush to liquidate players, especially if they have some internal value that might outweigh their trade value, but I have seen the argument a lot (and even presented it myself yesterday on the trade board) that Glendening would cost more to move because he is a veteran player signed to a really reasonable contract and is a leader/ good teammate/ could wear an A/ etc. kind of guy for us.

This is the Detroit Red Wings in 2019. This organization has overstocked itself on "leaders" and "good teammates" etc. for so long. Even if we did trade Glendening and the return isn't a thrilling assortment of picks/ prospects, this team still has Abdelkader, Helm, Ericsson, potentially Kronwall if he comes back for a year who have been with the organization for ~10-12 seasons. After that you have Green, Daley, Nielsen, Bernier who have all been around the league for considerable time and carry veteran leadership and experience with them.

Trading Luke Glendening doesn't mean the well is dry in terms of "good veteran leaders" or those types of guys. It means you want to capitalize on a depth player's value in the height of your team's rebuilding period, and there should be no issue with that. Again, liquidating him just to be rid of him - no point in that. He has a strong role and serves a purpose for the team. Getting solid value for a guy nearing 30 when the team is at least a couple years away from any serious contention? Absolutely pull the trigger on that.

Click to expand...

Aside from Larkin there is no player that should be off limits. Larkin is the only player with enough 'internal value' that he should be off limits. Right now the team is trending towards Iginla era Flames territory, where they have a couple of great pieces, but they are surrounded by trash and they never show anything for it.

Aside from Larkin there is no player that should be off limits. Larkin is the only player with enough 'internal value' that he should be off limits. Right now the team is trending towards Iginla era Flames territory, where they have a couple of great pieces, but they are surrounded by trash and they never show anything for it.

Click to expand...

I agree with you 100% there. I think most people on this board do agree with this general notion and think trading Glendening is advisable. I think the hesitation for some is that moving him for a 7th or something similar doesn't accomplish much and his impact and contract are fine for now if that's the best being offered. I'd be happy to get a 2nd for him or 3rd + prospect. Something along those lines would be a strong move, IMO.

I'd see if you can get Rasmus Sandin in exchange for Glendening. Sandin was a late first round pick and he's a mobile d-man which is exactly what we need. Toronto gets a high quality defensive forward to help round them out for the playoffs. Glendening is in his prime but Sandin is younger so it fits within the realm of a typical hockey trade. The problem with trading Glendening for a second round draft pick is it's going to be a late second and I don't have much confidence in our scouts turning a quality asset in Glendening into a quality prospect. We are not in a position to get poor quality in return for one of our few assets that have any real value.